A long ‘to do’ list for Edmonds City Council Tuesday night

It isn’t enough that the Edmonds City Council has to choose a new mayor Tuesday night. The council also will be holding public hearings on two significant proposals: whether to change from a mayor-led to a city manager-led governance structure and whether to ban the use of polystyrene, or Styrofoam, food containers in Edmonds. (In Washington state, the cities of Seattle and Issaquah and San Juan County are the only jurisdictions to have implemented a Styrofoam ban so far.)

The meeting starts at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at the Public Safety Complex at 250 5th Ave. N. The mayoral selection is at the end of the council agenda, after the two public hearings. The council will follow the same process that it used to fill recent vacant council seats: Each councilmember will have an opportunity to nominate a candidate from the eight people who applied. The first applicant to receive four council votes wins, and the council will go through as many rounds of balloting necessary to reach the four-vote majority. A link to the applications filed by the eight mayoral candidates can be found here.

You are a one note song. The issue is not that Styrofoam or mayor v. county manager is being discussed. The issue is that the most pressing issue is NOT being discussed and has not been on the calendar for a long time. It is not clear to me why you cannot reconcile the difference.

approval of claim checks, approving renewal of liquor licenses,proposal for increasing storm water drain rates,proposed salary for a mayor(how ironic),community service announcement, discussion on changing form of government, appointment of new mayor, public discussion on styrofoam……
huh? no budget conversation, no economic development conversation….a shame to because great opportunity to showcase their talents in front of a packed house!

Michael, there are two agendas, one for the TDB and one for the council,go to the website and look it up.

The transportation benefit district is vital to our economy because transportation is vital to our economy. If you read the agendas, this board is has been meeting more frequently than normal, because the council is moving ahead with some exciting stuff.

Priya, of course it isn’t enough for your taste. You want to address the economy by building lots of condos, and no, there not discussing that tonight.

ok, I admit to being new at the “angry at direction of city do something” about it journey I am on..but I went to the TDB site and the agenda is:
Continued discussion of increase license fees for TBD….where would I find discussion on pertinent issues like balancing the budget wout a levy, attracting business/revenues to Edmonds, cleaning up city eyesores (i.e. waterfront, skippers,old woodway high school, civic field, haines wharf) to name a few?
thx for ur help!

Priya, I don’t believe for one instance that you actually believe the council isn’t focused on the economy. You KNEW the were talking about transportation (which is economy) and yet you say they aren’t talking about the economy. No matter how much they actually do talk about the economy, you will always say they aren’t, unless the approach it from the taller building standpoint.

Maybe I am missing something but is everything in Edmonds about “Tall Buildings”…is this superman’s training city? Thought we had restrictions on building heights.

It is possible to hold the views that there is no reason for the voters to vote on a City Manager vs. Mayor right now and to believe in the voting process. The voters of the City have the power to change the system of Government, not the City Council. So, of course it will be up to the voters. “Let the People decide” is a redundant….they are the only ones who can! The question is why is the Council bringing it up now?

Styrofoam. Is anyone for the stuff? I don’t like it, but I also don’t want the small food services businesses to be left holding the, now paper, bag on this one. Banning styrofoam will make a great headline, but wouldn’t it make more sense to work with the vendors on sourcing reasonable alternatives? Help them rather than let them deal with the “ban” on their own? How about giving them a break, and offering to give them some help in finding alternatives?

ok got it…I see where they are looking to make sidewalk improvements, some stop lites and a bicycle loop..all important “services” for our town..I guess I was just looking for something more substantial in regards to the above issues I mentioned which will directly influence from a revenue standpoint our cities finances…u also mention that transportation is “economy” which I guess is true if you could define how such transportation will better enhance the economy of Edmonds..if you have nice sidewalks and new stop lites to better the flow of traffic that would be great if that traffic had somewhere to go besides home..

Anyone know what the costs of changing the form of government would be, aside from the cost to put it on the ballot? Changing the city codes to incorporate the new form, the legal costs, and all that? Just curious?

@Michael Burdett: those little discussions at the TBD are indeed important for the economy. Every little bit helps, and those periodic plan updates and project reviews are the rigor that is necessary to keep things from falling through the cracks and maintaining the infrastructure that we do have.
We all want more walkable neighborhoods, safer sidewalks that are ADA compliant, etc… So, by making these improvements, we make Edmonds a more desirable place to live, and perhaps we can draw a few families to move here. It’s not a comprehensive solution, but is a necessary and useful use of time.
But the fact that these issues are coming up is not evidence of prioritization by the Council, these things are being brought forward by others. I encourage the Council to get aggressive in setting priorities, creating some goals for the end of the year, and then hammering away until they’re complete.

@Dave: I was there at the Senior Center, too. I found it disturbing that you thought to videotape the discussion to find lines to take out of context and use against candidates. Not quite in keeping with the friendly small town character of Edmonds, is it?

– and… ditto what Diane T.already said about your impertinent beating of the building heights drum. The Planning Board agenda will give you fair warning of any challenge to our height restrictions, and I’m sure you’ll bring your video camera.

@Dave;
Nice. But, though I am married to Priya, you assume too much when you assert that we have the same vision. We’re two different people. You’re married (loved your meatloaf story on the blog), so you should understand that.
I’ll stand up for her, though, and say that she did quite a bit better in her first election than just about anyone else around Edmonds that was going up against an established incumbent. Funny, too, that now.. when someone does not come out on top in an election, their “vision and priorities are rejected”. Does this standard apply across the board, or only when your buddy Plunkett is challenged like he’d never been challenged before, and by a woman who held down a real job and was essentially a single mother during much of the campaign? So, Petso and Buckshnis were similarly rejected? You should stick to the issues. It’s a lot less messy that way.
–
Here’s the bottom line: the Council does not have established priorities. You were supposed to set priorities at the retreat. You didn’t. Only your arch-nemesis DJ Wilson spoke up about the lack of long-term thinking, and he was roundly chastised.
–
Now, we’re reaping the rewards of not doing Proper Prior Planning.

Sorry. Part of being in a representative form of government is that you can continue speaking and participating even if, you have lost an election. We don’t live is China. What’s the deal? You thought you’d add a note to your “building height” song.

You can’t win on the issues so you go for personal attacks that are really not relevant to the issue at hand. Back to Rovian style of politicking when you have not response. Yep…exactly what I expect from you.

It is not justified in any way to bring up Mr. Orvis’ arrest. He was not convicted of anything. That is how our system works. It is really unfair to use that as a way to discredit his opinions. I disagree with Mr. Orvis, but respect his right to argue his points as he sees fit minus the personal attacks. Spurious attacks on the character of the writer aren’t called for either. How about dealing with just the issues, and less about the personal vendettas?

Debate is wide open to all comers. The topic of discussion, in case you forgot, was what our Council should be working on. There is no stifling of that debate, only distraction.

We have only one Council. Arguing about who should, or should not, be there, is futile, and detracts from their ability to get their job done. Their job is to serve us. Let’s judge the Council on that alone.

And ideas should be judged on their merit, not based on who utters them. Or some imaginary correlation between personalities, polls, or arrests. Focus on the real, the pertinent, or risk continuing lurching into the future unprepared.

Move Edmonds forward. It is beneficial and good that there are citizens who question the priorities of the Council. That’s part of being an engaged electorate.

I have a great deal of respect for you. Let me explain my pioint above.

My point was to show Mr. Orvis that we all can bring up irrelevant issues and beat it to death. For example, as Mr. Orvis has done, the loss of my election. Just because I have lost an election does not mean that my opinion as a citizen should be disgarded. Who would run for office then?

Like Mr. Orvis, I can take something totally irrelevant to the issue at hand, his arrest, and argue that someone who has been arrested should not be considered credible. We know juries make wrong decisions all the time would be my one note song.

I know I can get back to the real issue at hand. I hope Mr. Orvis can as well.

Priya,
I agree that there is a lot of material that is spurious, irrelevant and inflamatory. But that is the way it goes. However, you choose to use something that is not only irrelevant, it was an attack on Mr. Orvis that has no place, NONE, in any context here. I disagree with Mr. Orvis, but his own posts stand on their own. People can decide what they think about his ideas from what he says. He has, as we all do, the right to present his ideas without being personally attacked, as do you. However, an arrest is not a conviction. You used that to unfairly question his credibility on unrelated issues. That is unacceptable under any circumstances. I my opinion you owe Mr. Orvis an apology and a retraction of your statement.

SUPPORT US when shopping at Amazon!
If you shop at Amazon, please visit there by clicking here. We’ll get a small commission on your purchase(s), which helps support My Edmonds News. Consider bookmarking this page for your future Amazon purchases.

We welcome comments on all posts at My Edmonds News. To encourage constructive community dialogue, all commenters must use their real names, first and last. Comments from users with names that don't comply with this policy will be removed. We also ask that you comply with our Code of Conduct policy, which you can view here.